1.Could fertility-sparing surgery be considered for women with early stage ovarian clear cell carcinoma?.
Dimitrios NASIOUDIS ; Eloise CHAPMAN-DAVIS ; Melissa K FREY ; Steven S WITKIN ; Kevin HOLCOMB
Journal of Gynecologic Oncology 2017;28(6):e71-
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present retrospective population-based study was to investigate the oncologic impact of uterine and ovarian preservation (OP) in premenopausal women with stage IA or IC ovarian clear cell carcinoma (OCCC). METHODS: The National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database was accessed and a cohort of surgically-staged premenopausal women (age <50 years) diagnosed with unilateral stage IA or IC OCCC was drawn. Based on site-specific surgery codes, women who did not undergo hysterectomy and/or bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) were identified. Overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) rates were calculated following generation of Kaplan-Meier curves; comparisons were made with the log-rank test. Multivariate Cox analysis was performed to control for possible confounders. RESULTS: A total of 741 premenopausal women who met the inclusion criteria were identified. Based on available information, rate of uterine preservation was 14.5% (96/663) while the rate of OP was 28.1% (71/253). Five-year CSS rates were 90.8% for women who did not undergo hysterectomy compared with 87.7% for those who did (p=0.290). Similarly, 5-year CSS rates in the OP and BSO groups were 92.6% and 85%, respectively (p=0.060). After controlling for disease sub-stage (IA vs. IC), uterine or OP was not associated with a worse overall or cancer-specific mortality. CONCLUSION: In the present cohort, uterine and OP did not have a negative impact on oncologic outcomes. Selection criteria for fertility-sparing surgery (FSS) could be expanded to include women with stage IA OCCC.
Adenocarcinoma, Clear Cell
;
Cohort Studies
;
Epidemiology
;
Female
;
Fertility
;
Fertility Preservation
;
Humans
;
Hysterectomy
;
Mortality
;
Ovarian Neoplasms
;
Patient Selection
;
Retrospective Studies
2.The influence of BRCA variants of unknown significance on cancer risk management decision-making
Jing Yi CHERN ; Sarah S LEE ; Melissa K FREY ; Jessica LEE ; Stephanie V BLANK
Journal of Gynecologic Oncology 2019;30(4):e60-
OBJECTIVE: To compare gynecological cancer risk management between women with BRCA variants of unknown significance (VUS) to women with negative genetic testing METHODS: Ninety-nine patients whose BRCA genetic testing yielded VUS were matched with 99 control patients with definitive negative BRCA results at a single institution. Demographics and risk management decisions were obtained through chart review. Primary outcome was the rate of risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (RRBSO). Chi square tests, t-tests, and logistic regression were performed, with significance of p<0.05. RESULTS: VUS patients were more likely to be non-Caucasian (p=0.000) and of Ashkenazi-Jewish descent (p=0.000). There was no difference in gynecologic oncology referrals or recommendations to screen or undergo risk-reducing surgery for VUS vs. negative patients. Ultimately, 44 patients (22%) underwent RRBSO, with no significant difference in surgical rate based on the presence of VUS. Ashkenazi-Jewish descent was associated with a 4.5 times increased risk of RRBSO (OR=4.489; 95% CI=1.484–13.579) and family history of ovarian cancer was associated with a 2.6 times risk of RRBSO (OR=2.641; 95% CI=1.107–6.299). CONCLUSION: In our institution, patients with VUS were surgically managed similarly to those with negative BRCA testing. The numbers of patients with VUS are likely to increase with the implementation of multi-gene panel testing. Our findings underscore the importance of genetic counseling and individualized screening and prevention strategies in the management of genetic testing results.
Demography
;
Female
;
Genetic Counseling
;
Genetic Testing
;
Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Syndrome
;
Humans
;
Logistic Models
;
Mass Screening
;
Ovarian Neoplasms
;
Referral and Consultation
;
Risk Assessment
;
Risk Management